Search a substantial collection of case-specific reasoning, then narrow it by petition, field, legal issue, or date.
This expanded collection favors source-backed access over perfect automated classification. Fields, labels, summaries, and relevance may contain errors; records marked ‘broader context’ need extra care. Review the cited source before relying on any record. These appeals and motions do not show approval odds or denial rates, and are not legal advice or a prediction.
membership in professional associations (criterion E)
Why AAO was not persuaded
Because the petitioner provided no information about what the registration entity is, it could not be established that it is a professional association.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Because the petitioner provided no information about what the registration entity is, it could not be established that it is a professional association.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-23_06_B5203; source_row=29836 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
letters from employer(s) showing at least ten years full-time experience (criterion B)
Why AAO was not persuaded
For the same reasons as the advanced degree analysis, the employment evidence lacked sufficient detail and independent corroboration. The letters did not adequately document progressively responsible experience in computer engineering.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
For the same reasons as the advanced degree analysis, the employment evidence lacked sufficient detail and independent corroboration. The letters did not adequately document progressively responsible experience in computer engineering.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-23_06_B5203; source_row=29833 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
official academic record showing degree/diploma/certificate (criterion A)
Why the evidence was persuasive
Although the petitioner did not establish that her coursework equated to a U.S. bachelor's degree, the evidence supports a finding that a college or university issued her a title of computer engineering, satisfying this criterion.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Although the petitioner did not establish that her coursework equated to a U.S. bachelor's degree, the evidence supports a finding that a college or university issued her a title of computer engineering, satisfying this criterion.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-23_06_B5203; source_row=29832 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Whether the labor certification requires at least an advanced degree (master's, or bachelor's plus 5 years progressive experience)
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO applied the plain language of the labor certification and concluded that the added 'in lieu of' phrase, combined with 'and/or', went beyond Kellogg and permitted combinations falling below the advanced-degree minimum.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO applied the plain language of the labor certification and concluded that the added 'in lieu of' phrase, combined with 'and/or', went beyond Kellogg and permitted combinations falling below the advanced-degree minimum.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-23_03_B5203; source_row=29821 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Inconsistencies in beneficiary's claimed education and experience
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO identified unresolved material inconsistencies between the equivalency evaluation, degree, transcripts, and employer letters, but did not adjudicate the issue dispositively; it flagged the discrepancies for any future filings.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO identified unresolved material inconsistencies between the equivalency evaluation, degree, transcripts, and employer letters, but did not adjudicate the issue dispositively; it flagged the discrepancies for any future filings.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-23_03_B5203; source_row=29822 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO agreed the Petitioner conflated the importance of the roads and highways industry with the national importance of his specific endeavor. The professor's letter post-dated the filing and described a future project, so it could not establish eligibility. The evidence about employing 21–29 workers at an unspecified location did not show broader national economic impact.…
Why this is useful
Compare how the decision separates a broadly important field from the prospective impact of the applicant’s specific work.
View full reasoning +
AAO agreed the Petitioner conflated the importance of the roads and highways industry with the national importance of his specific endeavor. The professor's letter post-dated the filing and described a future project, so it could not establish eligibility. The evidence about employing 21–29 workers at an unspecified location did not show broader national economic impact. General statements about small businesses did not address the specific proposed endeavor.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-22_02_B5203; source_row=29797 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
Third-party salary data was divergent and inconsistent, with Ziprecruiter showing ranges from $24,266 to $409,473. Institutional salary data was not shown to be representative of the field, and the comparison was further complicated by salaries being divided among different responsibilities, making it unclear how the Petitioner's salary breakdown compared to peers.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
Third-party salary data was divergent and inconsistent, with Ziprecruiter showing ranges from $24,266 to $409,473. Institutional salary data was not shown to be representative of the field, and the comparison was further complicated by salaries being divided among different responsibilities, making it unclear how the Petitioner's salary breakdown compared to peers.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-22_01_B2203; source_row=29792 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Original contributionsNot established
Case facts
Medicine / ClinicalProfessor
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Original contributions
original contributions of major significance
Why AAO was not persuaded
Altmetric profiles did not rank work against the same field; social media coverage and online news articles did not show major significance. Expert letters largely paraphrased article abstracts without explaining major significance, and several letters contained nearly identical language suggesting common authorship, undermining their probative value.…
Why this is useful
Distinguish original work from evidence that the contribution had major significance across the field.
View full reasoning +
Altmetric profiles did not rank work against the same field; social media coverage and online news articles did not show major significance. Expert letters largely paraphrased article abstracts without explaining major significance, and several letters contained nearly identical language suggesting common authorship, undermining their probative value. The Petitioner failed to show that his contributions actually impacted the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-22_01_B2203; source_row=29789 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO conducted an advisory final merits review despite the Petitioner not meeting the step-1 threshold, finding the record does not show sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO conducted an advisory final merits review despite the Petitioner not meeting the step-1 threshold, finding the record does not show sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-22_01_B2203; source_row=29793 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c